Bakhtiyar Muhtarov of Andijan – Justice and Rebirth is one of them.  He has interviewed 220 witnesses of the massacre and the subsequent arrests, torture and extrajudicial executions.  Nadejda Atayeva, Association of Human Rights in Central Asia, has collected evidence from Andijan morgue employees.  Shamsuddin Atamatov is one of the 23 businessmen whose trial led to the protests, and was a witness to the massacre.  Monica Whitlock recently produced a documentary film chronicling the tragedy.  She gained interviews with eyewitnesses.

With Bahtiyar Muhtarov, deputy director, Andijan – Justice and Rebirth

Shamsuddin Atamatov, former businessman in Andijan

Nadejda Atayeva, president, Association for Human Rights in Central Asia

Monica Whitlock, producer, Through the Looking Glass: The Andijan Massacre, and former BBC correspondent in Central Asia.

For further information please contact Luis Montero at Luis.Montero@osf-eu.org, telephone 07798737516

Please RVSP to Daniela White, Daniela.White@osf-eu.org

This event will be moderated by Mitchell Albert associate editor of Steppe Magazine.

Swiss photographer and writer Daniel Schwartz has been travelling and documenting the Central Asian republics since the early years of their independence from the Soviet Union. His artistic book about the region Travelling Through the Eye of History reflects on the entangled histories of the Silk Roads as well as present-day political and economic interdependencies linking the Caspian Sea and Kashmir, Iran and Western China via Afghanistan and the Pamirs.

Central Asia has been conquered and fought over for centuries. Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, the Russian and British empires during the Great Game and present day British and American troops have all battled there. Yet so little of what goes on between the countries and peoples that inhabit this vast swathe of land penetrates the Western media.

Schwartz is the recent recipient of the culture prize of the canton of Zurich, for his photographic achievement if the past 30 yrs, for bringing seemingly detached realities in front of the eyes of a saturated Swiss and Western public.

Photograph: Daniel Schwartz. Earning a Living on the Smuggler’s Road between Herat and the Iranian border- Afghanistan 2001.

In February this year, the Uzbek documentary-maker and photographer, Umida Akhmedova, was sentenced by a court in Tashkent, Uzbekistan for “slandering the nation”.  She did this in a photoalbum depicting scenes of ordinary life, mostly in rural areas of Uzbekistan, and in a documentary film, which detailed the burden on young brides to prove their virginity.  Both were funded by the Gender Programme of the Swiss Embassy.  She was found guilty on the basis of the conclusion of a panel of "experts", whose expertise derived solely from their positions in state structures – positions which they have conveniently retained in the transition from the Soviet era to independence, lining their pockets while doing so. 

Although Akhmedova was magnanimously granted amnesty in honour of independent Uzbekistan’s eighteenth birthday, the message was clear: members of civil society like Akhmedova, particularly when funded by Western backers, do not have the authority to depict life in Uzbekistan – only the state can do that.

The case has rightly attracted notoriety, as a severe infringement of freedom of expression, which is indicative of the increasingly totalitarian atmosphere in post-Soviet Uzbekistan.  But to understand the full import of the case, we have to enter the minds of the "experts" who convicted her, and ask: what was she "guilty" of?

In the verbose conclusion of the panel of "experts", two points stand out.  First, she insulted the national traditions.  Perhaps most importantly:

“she interpreted relations to Woman from the position of ‘gender’ politics, without paying attention to the national mentality and centuries-old traditions…” 

Notice how "gender" – a newfangled, Western term – is put in inverted commas and implicitly rejected, in favour of "relations to Woman" – a phrase with inequality built into it, whose authority derives from "centuries-old traditions".  Never mind the fact that women occupied a relatively high position in Uzbek society in Soviet times; never mind the fact that "national mentality", if the term has any meaning at all, is always in flux, that "traditions" are never static, but always interacting with historical circumstances.

But secondly, she was found guilty of portraying only “backward” villages, which are of course not representative of the shiny modern Uzbekistan built by President Karimov and his cronies.  As a result:

“A foreigner who has not visited Uzbekistan, seeing this album, will come to the conclusion that this is a country where people live in the Middle Ages.”

This is even more insulting than slandering the centuries-old traditions. Clearly "guilty".

So on the one hand, Akhmedova has dared to insult national traditions from a modernist (i.e. foreign) perspective; on the other, she’s made a modern country look backward.  Aren’t these charges a bit contradictory? Actually no: for Uzbekistan’s state elites, divorced from the realities of everyday life in their country, "traditions" are both ancient and modern.  So, for state elites, a kitschy national dance performed to pre-recorded music and disco lights encapsulates what it means to be Uzbek. 

Akhmedova’s ‘crime’ was to suggest something wholly different, something much more complex – a poignant clash of tradition and modernity which marks Uzbekistan’s place in the twenty-first century.  And the rabid reaction against her demonstrates above all the paranoia of the state elites – the awareness that a member of civil society might depict more accurately what it means to be Uzbek than they could ever do.

Read more about Umida Akhmedova’s case on the BBC website here or book In the Picture with Daniel Schwartz: Central Asia, the hinterland of war.

Below are some excerpts from the article (translation is mine).

Article introduction:

When his family delivered him to an orphanage in his 3 years, nobody would dare to think that this kid without patronage would become the patron of his state and his people after several decades.

His growing up in the orphanage was not without impacts on his character – he has faced with iron will all the cruel exams of the life and victory was always in his side.

In his way from an apprentice to the president, he has encountered both injustice, and betrayal, and assassination attempt, but has not been tired of serving his country and maintaining his alternativelessness with every means.

He turned away from his parents who left him to the orphanage, considered his state as his father, and his people as his mother. He has no relations with his son from his first marriage, but has fatherhood feelings towards all Uzbek people as well as two daughters of his whom he presents as his heirs to the public.

As he uses all means to achieve his goals, he creates different opinions about himself and  public protests, but he – Islam Karimov is The Greatest Uzbek in the eyes of his people and  a prominent leader and politician who has no alternatives even in forthcoming decades!..

From his childhood:

Islam Karimov was born in Samarkand, Uzbekistan on 30 January 1938. Information about his childhood is rather inconsistent. For example, one source notes that, his father was Abdulgani Karimov, an Uzbek agriculture worker from Samarkand, and his mother was Sanubar khanum, an ethnic Tajik. Other sources claim that his father was from Iran. Some sources state that his father was in jail between 1936 and 1941. When he returned home, he delivered 3-year-old Islam to an orphanage in Samarkand, while kept other children with him.

However, after the Second World War many new children around USSR arrived at Samarkand orphanage, therefore his parent had to take Islam Karimov back to their family. After orphanage, Islam became mischievous, and started to beat his brothers Ibod and Gunduz, as well as neighbours’ sons. Thus, his parents once again delivered Islam to orphanage in 1945. There is also interesting information about Islam’s mischievous behaviour in the orphanage. For example, when he was studying in the secondary school, he was threatening teachers with knife if they were giving him lower grades. Besides, he was famous for beating his classmates and other schoolchildren. He befriended only Jewish children, while beating permanently Russians, Tajiks and even Uzbeks.

Karimov and Uzbek language:

Another interesting fact about Islam Karimov is his learning of Uzbek language. Some biographical materials about Uzbekistan’s President note that Karimov’s family spoke Tajik, while in school he studied in Russian. However, in order to get a place in the public and political life of the country Karimov later learned his native tongue completely.

Karimov’s children:

Coming to family life, Karimov has two daughters from his second [last] marriage. The eldest, Gulnara Karimova has a successful business career. In addition, she writes poems, composes songs, and likes to sing. Nevertheless, Gulnara has a successful political career, too. She started her political career as a Deputy Foreign Minister. Some researchers consider her as a heir to Karimov.

Other daughter of Uzbek President, Lola is a graduate of Harvard University. She heads a philanthropic foundation called "You are not alone".

There is little information about Islam Karimov’s son from his first marriage. He is not considered as a heir to Karimov – either in his family, or in politics.